setting a time in Spain will always leave losers

The week started with Pedro Sánchez announcing that “the Government of Spain will propose to the EU to end the seasonal time change”. Immediately afterwards, the marmorena got involved. And not because the idea does not have popular support: when in 2018 the European Commission held his famous public consultation On the subject, 8 out of 10 people were in favor of ending it. The problem is another and much more thorny: what schedule do we stick with? The experts are clear about it. In fact, the consensus between specialists from the SES (Spanish Sleep Society) and many other international companies It’s surprising: science is with winter time. It is the time that (on paper) ensures better alignment with natural light, limits “social jet lag” and appears to consistently yield better health and safety results. “Winter time makes it easier to have more hours of sleep and a more natural awakening that coincides with dawn. If there were a permanent summer time, in the winter months there would be a lack of light in the morning and in the summer months an excess of light at night, a situation that imbalances the internal clock and can cause poor performance and vulnerability to certain diseases,” explained the SES in its public positioning. Martín Olalla, the great Spanish expert on these topics and a historical opponent of the elimination of change of seasonal time, often insists that the evidence makes it clear that the benefit is very limited. However, when choosing one of them, the winter one wins. And then everything becomes strange. Because, although no one says it explicitly, in the popular imagination “permanent schedule” is associated with an “eternal pseudo-summer” full of long afternoons to comfortably enjoy the little leisure that day-to-day life leaves us. But let’s face it, that’s not going to happen. Daylight saving time has problems. The main one is that enjoying “long afternoons” throughout the year condemns the west of the peninsula to sunrises around ten in the morning. For landing it in a specific way. In A Coruña, in the middle of the winter solstice, dawn at 10:03 in the morning and it would get dark at 17:01. Something that is, clearly, unfeasible. A zero sum game. In the end, the seasonal time change is a compromise solution that tries to adjust the civil time to the variability of the days. It is probably a bad solution, but it helps mitigate the problems that would arise when opting for either of the other two schedules in a stable manner. After all, with winter time Galicia, Asturias, Extremadura and western Andalusia would win; while they would lose the Mediterranean and the Balearic Islands. We would avoid very late sunrises in winter and we would improve sleep, health and the morning security. The problem is that you kill the afternoons, which is the only socially attractive thing about making a permanent schedule. And that “game” is not only regional. It is also economical. There are economic sectors such as tourism or hospitality, that prefer bright afternoons; but there are many others, such as school or industry, that prefer earlier sunrises. Sometimes, phrases like “the time zone or time that corresponds to us” give the impression that the schedule is something ‘natural’: that the clock is neutral and all we have to do is adapt to it. But not. Nothing is neutral: opting for daylight saving time, winter time or daylight saving time is deeply political. Something that, whether we like it or not, prioritizes some over others. It’s not a problem, what we have now does too. The problem is another. It is walking towards the abolition of the time change without being aware of it and, above all, without being prepared for it: thinking that abolishing the time change will end all our chronoproblems is ‘magical thinking’. It will create others and, for the first time in more than a hundred years, we will not be able to blame it on the seasonal time change. Image | Moncloa | Jon Tyson In Xataka | The war that ended at two different times: the time change has been giving Spaniards headaches for almost a century

The companies of AI know that competing is of losers. All seek to become the AI ​​monopoly

“If you are creating a company, what you will aspire to create a monopoly and avoid competition. The competition is of losers“. Those words were pronounced by Peter Thiel In a talk that gave Stanford students on October 7, 2014. Who gave way to talk, by the way, It was Sam Altman. During those 50 minutes Thiel – Paypal and Palantir co -confounder, billionaire, successful investor, and obsessed with rejuvenation– It raised precisely that fundamental idea: that all companies aspire to become a monopoly. They do not say it publicly, of course – that entails legal and regulatory problems – but the goal is that. It has happened in multiple cases in the world of technology. Windows is a de facto monopoly in desktop operating systems, Android and iOS are an accepted duopoly in mobile platforms, and Google is an indisputable monopoly in the world of searches. In all those cases, those who have tried to compete – and there have been attempts – have failed. The competition was indeed of losers. Another monopoly in sight: that of AI And here we are facing a situation that reminds us of all the above. In the world of AI we are living fierce competition. One in which dozens of companies try to develop their models and applications of AI to win the items to the others. To become monopolies. OpenAi carries the lead. The question is whether you can maintain that leadership. What model of AI is better than others? It is not entirely clear. The appearance of Grok 3 seems to have opted the balance in its favor, but its theoretical superiority in some tests sounds like the same as other previous releases sounded: if it is really the best, it will not last long to be. In fact, competition between these models has made us in a situation in which, sincerely, they are all quite good. There will be, of course, use cases in which some will stand out on others – this best program, this writes better, this looks better – but everything seems to point to the differences will be less and less evident. The improvements we are seeing in the market are getting smaller and, above all, more expensive. Grok 3 has been trained in the Gigantic Supercluster of XAI with at least 100,000 GPUS H100 of NVIDIA, but despite all those resources and that investment, which has achieved the startup of Elon Musk is to put themselves at the level of its compeditors, not to offer A product that suddenly is remarkably better. The same With the imminent GPT-4.5. What are Ia companies trying now? Two things: Try to make your products simpler to use: Less variety of models, or at least hide that variety, as Openai proposes in the future and simplified chatgpt version. As traditional models do not advance so much, they raise New models reasoning (Deepseek R1, O3-mini) or agents (Operator) that encourage us to pay for increasingly faces. That strategy is once again intended for the same: that their products stand out on the competition and achieve the desired objective: create the next great monopoly. In that race there is for now an outstanding protagonist, at least if we take into account the number of usuals of each model. According to CNBC data and others collected By Ed Zitronthe estimated current situation is as follows: ChatgPPT: 400 million weekly active users Deepseek: 27 million active users monthly Gemini: 18 million active users monthly COPILOT: 11 million active users monthly Perplexity: 8 million active users monthly Claude: 2 million active users monthly Especially the few users that Claude has theoretically, but what is evident is that Today for millions of users IA = chatgpt. Arriving the first here has made the difference for Openai, which has also constantly iterated to maintain that leadership. Will they keep doing it? Will they become the de facto monopoly of AI? Of course they have ballots for it, but it is still very soon to be able to say it. The frantic advance of this technology makes it more difficult than ever who will win the race … if there is only one winner. In fact, here the situation is very different because there are forces that Openai does not control. And they are too relevant forces. Windows: there is 1,400 million active PCs with Windows worldwide. That number includes both Windows 10 Machines with Windows 11. Android: there is 3.5 billion active devices based on Android. iOS/iPados: there is 2,350 million IOS active devices. Do you think Microsoft, Google and Apple are going to let Openai take the cat to the water? Not much less. They will do everything they can so that the AI ​​we use on their devices is yours. That’s why The idyll between Microsoft and OpenAi FLUQUEAand that’s why Google and Apple are little by little –too little by little In the case of Apple – integrating more and more functions of AI in its mobile phones. These companies, de facto monopolies already in their markets, have as clear as Peter Thiel that competition is for losers. They probably have it much clearer, especially because they have been since before Thiel gave their famous talk. We are therefore facing a situation that is analogous to that of the rest of the digital businesses with which we have lived. In the spotify audio streaming world it is almost a monopoly (31.7% share), while in the video the thing is much more distributed for the moment although Netflix stands out. In the world of Electronic Commerce Amazon marks the passage, on social networks to Facebook there are almost no one to have more examples such as Uber, LinkedIn, Match Group (Tinder, Okcupid), or PayPal, which are also clear leaders in their respective markets. Is there competition? Of course. Does competition change things? Normally, not too much: Firefox has not changed them In browsers, mobile operating systems that They tried to give options … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.